Toronto Concorde Corporate Centre Redevelopment | 159.36m | 47s | Fengate | Core

Preliminary Report on this one is headed to the Sept. 13th meeting of NYCC.

To my surprise, the report does not openly savage the application. LOL

It does indicate that Parks is seriously looking at the issue of 2 separate small park dedications in the plan vs the benefit of 1 large one. (good).
Also the City would like to see an affordable housing component (also good).

Report link here: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/ny/bgrd/backgroundfile-170169.pdf
 
So it's just now that the city wants to "establish local area study to develop a planning framework"? They're kidding right?

1) If that's the angle they're taking, this shouldve been done long ago

2) This should be rejected to the fullest extent not just on the overbearing amount of density the neighborhood that traffic will have to funnel through, but also the lack of amenities (recreation, libraries, childcare, schools, public health, human services, cultural services and employment services) this would bring to the neighborhood as a whole.
 
The thing I hate the most is the demo-ing of relatively new office buildings (not insubstantial in size) for pure, new, residential. I get that it would be difficult to attract new office users to a mixed-use version of this neighbourhood, but it's the absolute waste of embodied energy that puts this thing over the line for me.

Regarding the provision of other uses (libraries, schools, child care, etc.), I wish that the City would be a bit wiser in their use of planning carrots and sticks. They won't and this'll just go to OLT, but hey, could be worth a try. I could not care less about traffic - if you want to sit in your car all day, enjoy.
 
The thing I hate the most is the demo-ing of relatively new office buildings (not insubstantial in size) for pure, new, residential. I get that it would be difficult to attract new office users to a mixed-use version of this neighbourhood, but it's the absolute waste of embodied energy that puts this thing over the line for me.

Regarding the provision of other uses (libraries, schools, child care, etc.), I wish that the City would be a bit wiser in their use of planning carrots and sticks. They won't and this'll just go to OLT, but hey, could be worth a try. I could not care less about traffic - if you want to sit in your car all day, enjoy.
To a certain extent yes, but if you are planning this neighbourhood so that you functionally have to sit in your car all day, and it's a place where that can't really change that as it's hemmed in by the DVP and the Don Valley on 3 of 4 sides, I question it's the right place for density.

My point is this area is isolated and functionally needs a car for many types of trips still (though not all), and I just don't see it as a place that is ideal for this level of density. The density would be better directed to locations where most trips can be functionally made without a car.
 
So it's just now that the city wants to "establish local area study to develop a planning framework"? They're kidding right?

1) If that's the angle they're taking, this shouldve been done long ago

2) This should be rejected to the fullest extent not just on the overbearing amount of density the neighborhood that traffic will have to funnel through, but also the lack of amenities (recreation, libraries, childcare, schools, public health, human services, cultural services and employment services) this would bring to the neighborhood as a whole.
The thing I hate the most is the demo-ing of relatively new office buildings (not insubstantial in size) for pure, new, residential. I get that it would be difficult to attract new office users to a mixed-use version of this neighbourhood, but it's the absolute waste of embodied energy that puts this thing over the line for me.

Regarding the provision of other uses (libraries, schools, child care, etc.), I wish that the City would be a bit wiser in their use of planning carrots and sticks. They won't and this'll just go to OLT, but hey, could be worth a try. I could not care less about traffic - if you want to sit in your car all day, enjoy.

Here's the thing.........

The nearest elementary school for anyone in this area is Gateway Public School at the southern end of the Flemingdon Park community.
It's a whopping 2.6km away, and across the DVP and Eglinton.

No one is letting their kid make that walk in the morning alone and few would make the walk with them given a time commitment of 1hr 15 M roundtrip assuming you and your kid book it.

That's also where the nearest Library can be found.

The new mega-sized Rec Centre will be on the other side of Don Mills and just over 1.5km away. (Crosstown Community).

The nearest full-sized grocer is somewhat closer in the form of the Loblaws Superstore at Eglinton/Wynford, but the walk along Wynford is simply not one which is conducive to getting people to walk/bike to the store.

******

As @innsertnamehere notes above, if we want people to walk/cycle/take transit, we need to give them walkable, bikeable, neighbourhoods and short-distances to frequent transit.

This proposal, in its current form, based on the surrounding area as it is today, is a near total-fail.

It's the antithesis to the 15-minute City.

******

There are ways this could be made to work; subject to significant changes in both this proposal and its surroundings.......

But approving it, in anything likes its current form, reads as a mistake to me.
 
To a certain extent yes, but if you are planning this neighbourhood so that you functionally have to sit in your car all day, and it's a place where that can't really change that as it's hemmed in by the DVP and the Don Valley on 3 of 4 sides, I question it's the right place for density.

My point is this area is isolated and functionally needs a car for many types of trips still (though not all), and I just don't see it as a place that is ideal for this level of density. The density would be better directed to locations where most trips can be functionally made without a car.
That's exactly my issue, it's like the city has learned absolutely nothing from previous planning mistakes, and yet again they are too late when it comes to proper planning.

If an isolated area like this is going to have an excessively large amount of density, you better damn well make sure that the level of services and infrastructure are more than adequate. Because if not, it's just going to turn into another car loving community that's choked by gridlock. But yet again, apparently the city doesnt get it and we are on the path to yet another (stop me if you havent heard this before) poorly planned neighborhood. And if they are using the Crosstown LRT as justification as to why they should build this amount of density on site, then this city really has no idea what in the hell they are doing. Also to add, this is the exact problem with the province's flawed transit-oriented development approach, it assumes just because a transit station is in a neighborhood, it automatically jusfities why there should be X 40-story buildings built everywhere surround the station. This is yet another prime example of why that justification is flawed.

I see @Northern Light went into more details and pretty much summed up the issues this area faces.
 
...... it assumes just because a transit station is in a neighborhood, it automatically jusfities why there should be X 40-story buildings built everywhere surround the station. This is yet another prime example of why that justification is flawed.

If the density were even right at the Crosstown Station (abutting Eglinton) there would be some merit in its consideration. Clearly a school and supermarket would still be paramount considerations, along with childcare.

But the fact that this is set very far back from Eglinton removes even that basis for its consideration.
 
Two schools (plus six more out of frame to the left), extreme density, unfathomable retail, office, medical office, extensive and very frequent, prioritized, local bus service, direct connections to higher-order transit, etc. etc. etc.

1630429923776.png


As @Northern Light said above (my emphasis):
This proposal, in its current form, based on the surrounding area as it is today, is a near total-fail.
That wording is entirely correct.
 
So it's just now that the city wants to "establish local area study to develop a planning framework"? They're kidding right?

1) If that's the angle they're taking, this shouldve been done long ago

2) This should be rejected to the fullest extent not just on the overbearing amount of density the neighborhood that traffic will have to funnel through, but also the lack of amenities (recreation, libraries, childcare, schools, public health, human services, cultural services and employment services) this would bring to the neighborhood as a whole.
Absolutely should have done a Secondary Plan Study but planners were too busy with more logical locations like Don Mills & Eglinton and The Golden Mile. This is a minor stop on the LRT. Proposed density is +2x that allowed at the two studied. Also when the mandatory MTSA study is done it will show that about 75% of the land within 800 metres of the Wynford Stop is undevelopable: Flemingdon Golf Course, Don River ravine (Charles Sauriol Reserve), GO train line, DVP and cloverleaf and CPR twin track mainline.
Under Doug Ford ‘s rule they can’t just refuse to review an application; and he allows only 90 days for that. Then the developer applies to the OLT for approval. No democracy here.
 

3.3M-sq.-ft. redevelopment planned at Concorde Corp. Centre


Nov 3, 2021

Toronto’s Concorde Corporate Centre office complex could be transformed into a large mixed-use community if its owners get approval for a 3.3-million-square-foot redevelopment.

Fengate Asset Management, on behalf of the Labourers’ International Union of North America’s LiUNA Pension Fund of Central and Eastern Canada (LPFCEC), acquired the 7.7-acre property from Artis REIT for $114 million last November. The property currently consists of three office towers at 1 and 3 Concorde Gate and 12 Concorde Place on a site north of Wynford Drive just east of the Don Valley Parkway in North York.

“We acquired Concorde Corporate Centre with the intention to assess the development objectives that make the best sense for the neighbourhood, the planning framework and pension holders,” Joseph Mancinelli, LPFCEC chair, LiUNA International vice-president and regional manager for Central and Eastern Canada, said in an email interview with RENX.

Fengate is managing the investment and redevelopment proposal on behalf of LPFCEC. They require a zoning bylaw amendment and a draft plan of subdivision to accommodate the proposed development, which would see the demolition of the existing structures and construction of five residential and mixed-use buildings comprised of nine towers ranging from 40 to 52 storeys.

Size and scope of proposed development

The rezoning application proposes 4,086 dwelling units and 3.3 million square feet of residential space, 9,052 square feet of retail and 4,704 square feet of community space at grade. The proposed development also includes two new public parks located at the north and south ends of the site, comprising 39,719 square feet, and a new public street.

“We believe this proposal goes a long way to help balance the much-needed equilibrium between supply and demand in the Canadian housing market, particularly that of Toronto, by bringing more than 4,000 new residential units to the market in an area with major transit infrastructure currently under construction, the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, proudly built by members of LiUNA and workers across the skilled trades,” Mancinelli wrote.

Upon completion of the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, the property will provide pedestrian access to the downtown core via its connections to GO Transit and Toronto Transit Commission routes. The final stop of the proposed 15.6-kilometre, 15-station Ontario Line subway track, at the Ontario Science Centre, is located within a kilometre of the site.

The location also offers convenient pedestrian access to residential neighbourhoods, amenities and green space, as well as vehicular access to Highway 401, the Don Valley Parkway and the Gardiner Expressway.

When asked if the multiresidential buildings would be purpose-built rental apartments, condominiums or a mix of both, Fengate senior vice-president of real estate development Andrew Konev wrote that he envisions “a mixed-use, mixed-tenure and mixed-income community to provide much-needed housing options.”

Regarding current corporate leaseholders, Konev said Fengate “will respect all lease term obligations and is working closely with our valued Concorde Corporate Centre tenants to respond to all inquiries following our development application.”

Konev said his team will work closely with City of Toronto staff, community members, business improvement areas and the local city councillor regarding its proposal through the approvals process.

Construction of the new complex would be executed in phases over several years.

 
I really love the way you can visualize how an area is going to look by creating a model of the area from the computer. It really shows how dense this development is compared to the other proposals around it. As seen in FutureModelTo in the photo up above.
 
So this one has apparently gone to OLT.

It also has an active opposition in the form of nearby residents in tall buildings, LOL

I have real concerns about what is proposed, and in so far as the discussion is about preserving employment uses, usable parks, and schools within walking distance, I'm entirely fine with some opposition here.

But....but

If you read this site: http://wynford-concorde.com/

While there are some good concerns............

There's also this:

1648077894954.png


Summary, we want more towers-in-the-park like we live in...........

Sigh..
 
Personally I think the density would be ridiculous, but I'm really reminded of a colleague who had sold an apartment building she co-owned with her sisters in High Park to invest in one of the Concorde Place (5 or 7) buildings right before the late 1980s real estate crash. She had to move into one of her condos because it wouldn't sell.
 
Couple people saying this is too much density because it's too far from subway stop. It's like a five minute walk for the people furthest away, maybe seven if you walk slow. That is a distance as a downtowner I would walk everyday, I would walk twice that. Take a look at the density north of High Park that has been there forever, it's about the same distance. Hopefully the apartments furthest away would have cheaper rents just like in the High Park neighbourhood.
1648093598501.png
 

Back
Top